Posted on 04/17/2005 6:39:59 PM PDT by neverdem
Former United States Senator Bob Kerrey, the president of the New School University and a Democratic candidate for president in 1992, said yesterday that he was considering a run for mayor of New York City, declaring that Michael R. Bloomberg had failed to fight Washington Republican policies that Mr. Kerrey said endangered the city's finances and security.
Mr. Kerrey, in an interview, also questioned why Mr. Bloomberg had invested so much energy in trying to build a stadium on the West Side of Manhattan. Mr. Kerrey said it would make more sense to put the stadium in another borough, and that the rezoning of the West Side proposed as part of stadium plan would overwhelm the neighborhood.
Asked about reports from other Democrats that he had talked to associates about possibly running against Mr. Bloomberg, Mr. Kerrey at first said he was inclined not to run for mayor. But a moment later, in what turned out to be an expansive conversation, he said, "You know me: I am just crazy enough to do this."
Aides to Mr. Bloomberg said they were surprised by Mr. Kerrey's comments. They said that just last week Mr. Bloomberg called Mr. Kerrey and asked him to head "Democrats for Bloomberg" - and Mr. Kerrey accepted.
Mr. Kerrey confirmed that conversation. "That is exactly right," he said last night. But he said that he began having second thoughts almost as soon as he had accepted.
A former senator from Nebraska who moved to New York to become the president of New School University in 2001, Mr. Kerrey has raised the prospect of a candidacy at a time when there has been rising anguish among New York Democrats over the candidacy of Fernando Ferrer, the former Bronx borough president who has been struggling in his third bid to become mayor. Asked whether he thought Mr. Ferrer could now defeat Mr. Bloomberg given his troubles, Mr. Kerrey responded, "I don't know."
Beyond Mr. Ferrer, who had long been viewed as the strongest Democrat in the race, other major Democrats vying to challenge the Republican Mr. Bloomberg are the Manhattan borough president, C. Virginia Fields; the City Council speaker, Gifford Miller; and United States Representative Anthony D. Weiner.
Mr. Kerrey, 61, said that he just signed a contract extending his stay at the New School through 2011, but that he could break it if necessary. He said he would decide within a few days whether to run.
Mr. Kerrey himself suggested that his talk may ultimately amount to little more than the musings of a New York Democrat frustrated by a national government controlled by Republicans.
His task would be daunting, should he decide to enter at this late date. For one thing, he would be far behind his Democratic rivals in raising money. For another, Mr. Kerrey has lived in New York for only four years, making him even more of a transplant than Mr. Bloomberg, who is from Boston.
"The hard truth of this is I became a New Yorker on the 11th of September, 2001," he said. "Now it's in my gene code. I lived here for four years, but thanks to Sept. 11, this is now my city. I care about what happens to it."
Mr. Kerrey said he began thinking about running for mayor as he watched the House of Representatives vote to repeal the estate tax. At the time, he said, he was filling out his own tax return and was reminded of how many New Yorkers had been hurt by provisions of the tax code - the Alternative Minimum Tax - which has had the effect of eliminating the deduction of state and local income taxes for many Americans.
"I am angry about the way New York City is being treated by Washington, D.C.," Mr. Kerrey said. "Who is fighting these guys? What would Giuliani and Koch be doing now? They'd be raising hell!"
Still, in the course of the interview, Mr. Kerrey offered some words of praise for the man who might be his rival.
"I like Bloomberg a lot," Mr. Kerrey said. "I think he's been gutsy. I think he's authentic. I like what he did with the schools. He calmed race relations in New York in a way that I think is quite impressive.
"But there are areas where I'm not so happy," Mr. Kerrey continued.
He said that Mr. Bloomberg was devoting far too much energy to the West Side stadium, and that his rezoning proposal would be very damaging to the neighborhood.
And he said Mr. Bloomberg had failed to fight Republicans in Washington when they were approving measures that he said were damaging to the city - from tax cuts that do not benefit New York residents to the allocation of national security money away from New York.
Mr. Bloomberg's aides said Mr. Kerrey and Mr. Bloomberg have been in agreement that homeland security dollars should be doled out based on assessed threat, which would result in more federal money for New York.
"The mayor was the first public official to draw attention to the fact that homeland security funds need to be distributed by risk and threat and the resulting formula changes will result in millions in dollars that New York City would otherwise never see," said Edward Skyler, Mr. Bloomberg's press secretary.
Mr. Bloomberg's aides noted that even Senator Charles E. Schumer, a Democrat, has complimented him for lobbying Washington. Last week, Mr. Bloomberg made a high-profile trip to Washington, where he met with Congressional leaders and Michael Chertoff, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. But even as he has called for more money from Washington, the mayor has declined to criticize his fellow Republicans, arguing that it would be counterproductive to rail against those from whom he seeks help.
But Mr. Kerrey disagreed "We need to start fighting these guys to change their priorities," he said. "I don't think you do that by being a nice guy."
Mr. Kerrey acknowledged last night that it might seem unusual to go, in the space of a week, from agreeing to head Democrats for Bloomberg to talking about challenging him this year. He said the shift reflected his own ambivalence about a mayor who he said was good in some ways, but flawed in others.
He said that he had not informed Mr. Bloomberg that he was thinking of running for mayor, or that he had decided against heading the committee. "I guess they know now," he said.
How am I defending him? Are you blind? Is someone reading this aloud for you?
I recall the times he was on the 9-11 Commission Circus and lied point blank about Richard Clark's book being the gospel truth when it hadn't even been published or vetted. And of course we now know how Clark has been discredited and his pathetic partisan agenda.
Kerrey also got pretty mouthy and intimidating with some of the swift boat veterans or freepers (sorry, can't recall which right now) out on the steps of some building in Washington, asking names etc. Actually I think it was freepers. IIRC, he swore at them when he stomped off in a huff.
If that's the sort of candidate that is respected and relished in NY, then they get what they deserve. As for me, it's a pointed reminder why I'll do everything in my power to never have to reside there.
Ok, the second worst, the "White Dinkins."
Because once Bloomberg is gone, it'll clear the deck for an actual Republican to run?
Yes, war criminal. Remember how he shot up the village in Vietnam - killing old men, women and children?
MSM has conveniently forgotten about that.
I see what you mean now - with friends like that who needs enemies? Can't stand Kerrey nonetheless.
In New York City, we can do a lot worse than Kerrey... at least he's got some midwestern values somewhere in there. Our last Democrat mayor was David Dinkins - NYC was a crime-ridden jungle under his "leadership". Giuliani cleaned up the city, big time, though Bloomberg is steadily erasing those gains.
"I have one very good reason why the west side stadium is a great idea -- jobs, jobs, jobs."
I remember Bloomberg saying that. Wouldn't a big new shiny city-owned socialist steel mill on that same site create more and better jobs, jobs, jobs? Bloomberg should get cracking on less taxes, taxes, taxes.
who pays to build the deck over the west side train yards? and all the public infrastructure? the Jets could sell out every home game even if the stadium was built in a swamp (like the Meadowlands) - most of the economic benefit from the stadium in Manhattan goes to the city though an increase in the tax base from the business it brings, not the Jets. The Jets aren't collecting hotel taxes or income taxes from workers employed in service sector jobs like restaurants. That's why the city should make this investment.
because building it in Flushing or in NJ won't bring any economic growth to those areas post construction. whats around shea stadium now? nothing, people drive to the game and go home. there is no hotel business, no conventions, no people eating at restaurants. there is zero economic benefit (other then the construction work itself) to building it in a swamp or next to Shea stadium. It won't bring any tourism or convention dollars to those areas. People will simply drive to the game, and leave, just like they do now.
no, just the opposite is true. if bloomberg loses, whatever base of voters and political apparatus that was put together by Rudy to elect someone who is not part of the Democratic regime of NYC - will dissappear. Yes, Bloomberg is a RINO and all that. But the important part of getting him re-elected is to preserve some political apparatus outside the corrupt Dem machine that ruled the City. In 2009, perhaps there will be someone more acceptable to take the reins of that apparatus and get elected.
If Bloomie goes down, you won't see another Mayor outside the Democratic regime until the City is run down to the 2000 murder per year level like it was under Dinkins. That's what it would take to elect another Rudy-like Mayor - it would have to get so bad again, that people couldn't take it. I would rather not see that happen.
To attempt to explain is not the same as to defend.
If Bush the Elder lost to Kerrey, although I would have preferred Bush the Elder to win in 1992, I don't think Kerrey would have damaged this country as much as Clinton did.
Is that clear enough?
But Kerrey is not part of the corrupt NYC Democrat apparatus. He's not even an officeholder at the moment. Given the massive advantage that Democrats have in this city, a relatively uncorrupt Democrat is a bigger threat to that apparatus than a RINO.
He'll be perfect as mayor of NYC.
Sorry. That should have read: "narcissistic, metrosexual a-hole egomaniac..."
Thanks, Jackbill, for reminding everybody that this guy is practically an admitted war criminal (except he can't really remember if he killed innocent men, women and children). And I agree with another Freeper who said he's probably hoping for "an incident" to ride into the White House.
I can't believe what is happening to my beloved city.
"who pays to build the deck over the west side train yards? and all the public infrastructure?"
Who cares? If there is a private sector use for it someone will.
If the stadium were really going to make any money, the Jets would pay for the whole shebang and rake in the cash. The fact that the Jets are not risking much of their own money indicates that the market has no faith in the stadium proposal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.